Economy
Nestoil, Neconde To Remain Under Receivership As Court Adjourns Case After Lawyers’ Tussle
Nestoil, Neconde To Remain Under Receivership As Court Adjourns Case After Lawyers’ Tussle
Nestoil, Neconde to remain under receivership as court adjourns case after lawyers’ tussle. A disagreement over authorised legal representatives of respondents has stalled proceedings at the court of appeal in Lagos in the suit filed by FBN Merchant Bank Ltd and First Trustees Ltd against a ruling of a federal high court.
On Thursday, Yargata Nimpara, presiding judge at the court, held that the issue of legal representation of Nestoil Limited and Neconde Energy Limited (the respondents) must be resolved before the court could hear the matter.
As a result, In effect, the accounts of Nestoil, Neconde, Ernest Azudialu-Obiejesi and Nnenna Obiejesi remain frozen while Nestoil/Neconde’s 45 percent interest in OML 42 JV remain under Receivership.
Nestoil was placed under receivership by a consortium of lenders over an alleged debt of $1.01 billion and N430 billion following an order of a federal high court.
However, Nestoil, its affiliate, Neconde Energy, and their promoters — Ernest Azudialu-Obiejesi and Nnenna Obiejesi — obtained another high court injunction directing the receiver to suspend further action.
The receiver retook possession of the property after the court of appeal granted a “restorative injunction” in an ex-parte application filed by FBN Merchant Bank and First Trustees.
The court scheduled the hearing of the motion on notice for December 4, 2025.
At the hearing on Thursday, confusion broke out after the court directed counsel to announce their appearances.
Ayoola Ajayi, senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN), announced appearance for the first respondent (Nestoil Limited), while Ayo Olorunfemi, SAN, announced appearance for the second respondent (Neconde Energy Limited).
In addition, Muiz Banire, SAN, and Wole Olanipekun, SAN — who represented Nestoil and Neconde respectively at the lower court — also announced appearances for both firms.
On the other hand, Babajide Koku, SAN, appeared for the appellants alongside Kunle Ogunba, SAN.
Speaking on the matter, Ajayi argued that it was evident there was a dispute over who was authorised to represent both firms, urging the court to address the issue and provide direction on the appropriate counsel for each party.
In response, Banire maintained that his representation was not in question and that he remained counsel of record from the lower court.
On his part, Olanipekun argued that since the court had not heard any application challenging his representation, he remained the recognised counsel for the second respondent.
He added that he had not been served with any application questioning his role.
Addressing the situation, Nimpar expressed dissatisfaction, asking both parties to resolve the issue before the next hearing.
“There is an obvious conflict regarding the applications for change of counsel filed on behalf of the first and second respondents,” she said.
“Those applications must be taken first to resolve the issue of legal representation before the court can proceed with any other application. The applications, which are not yet ripe for hearing, have now been filed.”
She, therefore, adjourned the case to January 15, 2026.
Banks Place Nestoil Under Receivership Over $1Bn Debt
LEGAL SHOWDOWN
A federal high court sitting in Lagos had on October 22, 2025 issued an order of Mareva authorising First Trustees and its subsidiary, FBNQuest Merchant, to take over the company’s assets.
Justice D. I. Dipeolu issued the injunction against the defendants — Nestoil and its affiliate, Neconde Energy, as well as Azudialu-Obiejesi and Obiejesi.
Dipeolu restrained dealings in the sum of $1,012,608,386.91 and N430,014,064,380.77 — the total indebtedness as of September 30, 2025.
There were other debts personally guaranteed by Azudialu-Obiejesi, with over N366.8 billion, $61.2 million, $152 million, and N10.4 billion owed to Access Bank, First Bank and Zenith Bank.
However, Nestoil and its principal promoters approach a federal high court to set aside the order of Mareva which was granted before the latest development.
ICYMI: Governor Fubara Orders Immediate Employment For Children Of Fallen Servicemen
ICYMI: Governor Fubara orders immediate employment for children of fallen servicemen. Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara, has directed the immediate employment of children of fallen servicemen in the state.
He gave the order on Thursday during the 2026 Armed Forces Remembrance Day ceremony at Government House, Port Harcourt, instructing the Secretary to the State Government to ensure swift implementation.
Fubara
Fubara said the move reflects the state’s commitment to supporting security agencies and families of personnel who died in active service, as he also pledged continued welfare and logistical support for the military.
EFCC Tenders More Fresh Bank Records In Yahaya Bello’s ‘N110.4bn Fraud’ Trial
EFCC tenders more fresh bank records in Yahaya Bello’s ‘N110.4bn fraud’ trial. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Thursday tendered fresh bank records in the ongoing trial of Yahaya Bello, former governor of Kogi state, before a federal high court in Abuja.
Bello is standing trial alongside Umar Shuaibu Oricha and Abdulsalami Hudu on a 16-count charge bordering on criminal breach of trust and money laundering involving about N110.4 billion.
At the resumed hearing before Maryanne Anineh, the presiding judge, the prosecution team, led by Kemi Pinheiro, a senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN), presented prosecution witness six (PW6), Mashelia Arhyel Bata, a compliance officer with Zenith Bank, for further cross-examination.
During cross-examination, Joseph Daudu, counsel to the first and second defendants, questioned the witness on exhibit S1—a statement of account earlier tendered by the prosecution.
Daudu asked the witness to clarify his earlier testimony that the statement of account contained eight columns, particularly the meaning of the “description” column. Bata explained that the column reflected the narration of transactions.
He drew the court’s attention to an entry dated January 20, 2016, which reads: “Cq 158 Abdulsalami Hudu for N10,000,000.”
Bata also pointed out another entry stating, “ZB chq 155 paid Halims Hotels and Tours, Lokoja, N2,454,400.”
When asked whether he knew the purpose for which the N10 million paid to Hudu or the sum paid to Halims Hotels and Tours was used, the witness said he could not determine how the funds were spent or their intended purpose.
Daudu further referred the witness to exhibit X1 and asked him to identify it.
Responding, Bata said it was the account-opening package for a company with account number 1014878995, domiciled at Zenith Bank’s Lokoja branch.
The defence counsel then asked the witness about the number of transactions recorded within specific dates.
While Daudu suggested there were 21 transactions between March 10 and March 12, 2016, the witness said the entries he was working with began from November 14, 2016.
Directing the witness to entries dated December 6, 2016, Daudu asked him to read them out.
Bata told the court that the first entry was a transfer from the Kogi State Internal Revenue Service, credited with N74,378,483.20, adding that another entry on the same day showed a cheque payment of N10 million to Mohammed Jami’u Sallau.
Yahaya Bello
Asked whether the statement indicated the purpose of the payment, the witness said the narration did not indicate the reason for the transaction, adding that the same applied to another N10 million credit in favour of Sallau.
The witness was also cross-examined by Z.B. Abbas, counsel to the third defendant, Abdulsalami Hudu, who asked whether all withdrawals made by the third defendant were by cheque, to which the witness replied in the affirmative, adding that authorised signatories duly signed the cheques.
Abbas also confirmed from the witness that exhibit X1 was the statement of account of the government house account.
On exhibit X2, the witness said the third defendant was introduced to the bank as a civil servant and accountant.
Value-Added Tax: What To Know About VAT Fee For Banking Services
Value-Added Tax: What to know about VAT fee for banking services. On Thursday, banks said they will start deducting 7.5 percent value-added tax (VAT) on banking services, including point of sale (POS) transaction fees, mobile banking transfer fees, from January 19.
In an email to customers, Moniepoint Microfinance Bank said the charge stems from a government-endorsed regulatory change, with the proceeds of the charge remitted to the Nigerian Revenue Service (NRS).
“The NRS has communicated a deadline of 19th January for all financial institutions (commercial banks, microfinance banks and electronic money transfer operators) to start collecting and remitting VAT,” the bank said.
According to the statement, the VAT is not on the actual amount sent by customers but on the service fee.
In this report, TheCable provides a breakdown of what you need to know about the development.
WHAT ARE BANKING SERVICES?
Banking services comprise various financial products and services provided by banks and other financial institutions to individuals, corporations, and government agencies.
Banks usually deduct fixed service charges from customers per transaction on such financial services
For instance, a N50 stamp duty and a N50 electronic money transfer fee is deducted from customers when an electronic transfer is made on transactions.
Such charges include electronic banking charges such as point of sale (POS) transaction fees, mobile banking fees (transfers), unstructured supplementary service data (USSD) transaction fees, and POS activation fees.
Other charges include card issuance fees, SMS alert charges, and account maintenance.
WHAT WILL BE DEDUCTED?
Banks are required to deduct VAT on eligible banking charges and remit it to the NRS.
The fee applies to the service charge, not the actual transaction amount.
For instance, on electronic transfer fee, if a customer intends to send N50,000 to a loved one, the bank deducts N50 as bank charges, the customer will pay the 7.5 percent on the bank charge.
Value-Added Tax
As a result, the 7.5 percent VAT will be applied to the N50, and not the principal amount (N50,000).
Consequently, a total amount of N50,053.75 will be deducted from the customer.
IS VAT CHARGE A NEW DEVELOPMENT?
In a statement on Thursday, the NRS said the VAT charge on banking services, fees, commissions, and electronic money transfers is not newly introduced.
“VAT has always applied to fees, commissions, and charges for services rendered by banks and other financial institutions under Nigeria’s long-established VAT regime,” the statement reads.
According to the service, the Nigeria Tax Act did not introduce VAT on banking charges, nor did it impose any new tax obligation on customers in this regard.
-
Crime8 months agoKogi Assembly Considers Law To Regulate Rent, Establish Control Board: Tenancy Law
-
News10 months agoAtiku Reveals Why He Failed To Pick Wike As Running Mate In 2023
-
Crime11 months agoFederal High Court Jails 2 For Vandalizing Transformer, Telecom Mast In Kogi
-
Akwa Ibom12 months agoThe Apostolic Church Gets New Territorial Chairman, Exco
-
News11 months agoThe Apostolic Church Gets New National President, Executive
-
Akwa Ibom12 months agoUmo Eno Commences Payment Of 80,000 Naira Minimum Wage With Arrears
-
News11 months agoSenator Natasha Returns To Senate With Husband Amid Seat Dispute
-
Economy8 months agoKiyosaki: Is Tinubu’s Government Afraid Of Ibrahim Traore?